Category Archives: Planning

Post navigation

Few understand the power of the investment allocation model, even in – especially in – times of crisis; but the power can be great when tied to a long-range financial plan.

iStock Images

Jim Lorenzen, CFP®, AIF®

I can almost guarantee that not many people fully realize the power of an investment model as a means to fulfill a long-range financial plan, even in – or especially in – times of crisis.

The chances of a V-shaped recovery appear to be slim; not just because of the chances of a new spike in the pandemic due to possible premature reopening of the economy, it’s more about how market recoveries generally occur; yet, the power of the investment model remains unknown to many.

Many people intuitively believe that a 20% loss can be recaptured with a 20% gain; but, of course it’s not true. If you start out with $100, a 20% loss takes you down to $80. But, to get back to $100, you need to see your $80 grow by 25% ($20 ÷ $80). So, knowing that it takes a 25% gain to buy back a 20% loss, it’s easy to see why recoveries generally take longer than the original decline.

When we suffer declines in the market, it can be tempting for some people to sell on the way down in an attempt to cut their losses. The problem, of course is that calling the ‘bottom’ is difficult, because recoveries seldom occur in a straight line. Next thing they know, the recovery happened and they missed the rebound forcing them to buy back in at a new high. As you can see from this chart, a simple buy-and-hold philosophy would have been much easier without forcing them to become a market genius. After all, if Warren Buffett can’t time markets – and he says he can’t – than, why should we try?

That’s where the power of the investment allocation model comes in.

Those who’ve been smart enough to build their financial future with a blueprint tend to have a framework for fulfilling their long-range strategic plan. On the investment side of their planning, the foundation is an customized asset allocation. What few realize is that that allocation has an automatic buy low/sell high mechanism that comes built-in!

Let’s look at a simplified example:

Since we talking about stocks more than bonds, let’s use an example of a simple growth-oriented allocation that’s comprised of 70% stocks and 30% bonds, with the majority of the stocks in the domestic U.S. market (represented here using the S&P index) and a lesser amount in foreign stocks (represented here using a Europe, Asia, and Far East index).

Let’s assume our hypothetical investor has $500,000 invested. To make it simple, basic stock-bond allocation would look like this:

Stocks are now underweighted by 5% and bonds are now overweighted 5%. The great thing about models is that they can, and usually are, rebalanced on some type of schedule or according to some built-in protocol. To get back to our original allocation, money will have to be reallocated from bonds into stocks – the rebalancing ensures that we’re now buying low.

In order to get stocks back to their 70% weighting, we’ll need to bring the stock total to $301,000 ($430,000 x 70%). That will require moving $21,000 from bonds ($301,000 – $280,000). So, our rebalanced allocation is now:

Stocks: $301,000 = 70%Bonds: $129,000 = 30%Total: $430,000 = 100%

Now, over time, the stock market finally recovers the 25% needed to get back to where it was. That 25% gain in stocks adds $75,250 to stock value:

Stocks: $376,250 = 74%Bonds: $129,000 = 26%Total: $505,250 = 100%

Notice, we didn’t just get back to where we were before, we actually made money! We ‘beat the market’? How did that happen? The market returned to where it was but we ended-up ahead!

Rebalancing the investment model allowed us to buy low and sell high without being a market genius!

Now, of course, this is a over-simplified hypothetical (you can’t buy an index and I’ve ignored things like the time-frame involved, taxes, inflation, and a lot of other stuff), but, the concept is no less valid.

Oh, yes, rebalancing again now, getting us back to our original allocation, now means that we’re `selling high’ as the 4% overweighted stock money is now repositioned back to bonds until next time.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

Opinions expressed are those of the author. The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

I wouldn’t. I also wouldn’t be driving in a strange city without a GPS.

Jim Lorenzen, CFP®, AIF®

It looks like the COVID-19 issue is going to be with us for awhile; the U.S. is still seeing over 25,000 new cases each day and some medical experts think we’re in a two-year process, which makes some sense considering the time it takes to get a vaccine into mass distribution, as well as getting the public to embrace it the way they did the polio vaccine in the 1950s.

Congress, of course, has been passing relief measures which, among some, are raising concerns about the national debt which now stands around at 100% of GDP while unemployment payments in excess of normal wages are creating a disincentive for some Americans to return to work until August, when those benefits are due to expire.

We’e in, of course, an ‘event-driven’ bear market which some would call a structural bear in that it is the result of a government-induced forced shut-down. Given that about 70% of our economy is driven by the consumer and no one knows when they will feel safe enough to work, shop, travel, and go to sporting events (a $12-billion industry) – not to mention the achievement of mass innoculation; some experts believe that the bear could last as long as 42 months.

Whenever economic crisis occurs – and it has on numerous occasions throughout history – the lesson comes home that building a financial house without a blueprint makes for bad construction and a poor outcome. That blueprint, of course, is a financial plan that serves as the foundation for an investment process – and a process is not a group of transactions. Today, of course, those who’ve done it the right way are seeing the value, and the power, of having a model to follow and stay within.

If you have a plan, make sure you keep it updated. If not, maybe it’s time to begin one. If you’d like some help, you can begin your process here.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

Opinions expressed are those of the author. The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

Everyone intuitively understands the need to have a balanced approach to meet retirement needs; however, it’s also important to address risk in light of the long term inflation risk.

Let’s take a hypothetical example using simple numbers. And, suppose after all the data gathering, goal setting, and risk assessments have been completed in the financial planning process, June and Ward Cleaver (yes, I am that old) have decided they feel comfortable with a portfolio that’s comprised of 60% bonds and cash and 40% in stocks.

June and Ward are retiring today after over thirty years of working and saving—they’ve done a lot of thing right—and have accumulated a nest-egg of $1 million. So, in our simple example, that would indicate their money should be arranged with $600,000 allocated to bonds and cash, and $400,000 to stocks. Simple.

But, suppose the two of them also have Social Security income—maybe even pension income, as well. This additional ongoing cash flow shouldn’t be ignored in constructing their allocation. Again, to keep numbers simple (I’m highly qualified for simple numbers). Let’s say Ward and June have an additional $30,000 in annual ongoing income to augment their savings.

What does that $30,000 annual income represent? How much would someone need to have invested to provide the same income?

Assuming a 4% annual withdrawal rate on assets – we’ll say that fits June and Ward’s situation – that $30,000 represents income on an additional $750,000 in assets… except these assets are illiquid: June and Ward can only take the income, they can’t ‘cash in’ the principal. It is like, in effect, an annuity, something some people use to simply ‘purchase’ a lifetime income. I’m not a big proponent, but they do have their place in some situations—but that’s another story.

Nevertheless, if we consider that $30,000 annual income as actually representing an additional asset, June and Ward really effectively have $1,750,000 in assets, $750,000 of which we’ll consider illiquid and providing an income of $30,000 at 4%, but it never runs out of money. If 60% of their total retirement ‘assets’ is to be allocated to bonds, their bond portfolio might now be $1,050,000 (60% of $1,750,000), $750,000 of which is already allocated and providing $30,000 in income.

That leaves $300,000 ($1,050,000 – $750,000) to be allocated to bonds from their nest-egg. This decreases their nest-egg bond and cash allocation from the original $600,000 to $300,000, and therefore raises their stock allocation from $400,000 to $700,000. If long-term inflation is an issue – and it is – then were June and Ward really risking being under-allocated to stocks?

The ‘guaranteed’ $30,000 cash flow, representing an illiquid asset, provides them with the ability, i.e., gives them the freedom, to still address short-term needs and objectives with $300,000, while allowing more money, $700,000) to address long-term inflation risk.

Historically, stocks have performed, simply because they represent the economic engine of the United States. And, it has never made sense to bet against the U.S.A. Pistons drive the engine and the engine provides forward movement.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

Opinions expressed are those of the author. The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

Markets always do; but strategies in the future will have to be different.

iStock Images

Jim Lorenzen, CFP®, AIF®

Maybe. You might think so.

While the S&P was down 10.5% year-to-date as of Friday, it’s still UP 1.1% for the last 12 months while foreign stocks actually lost 13.1%. Who’d a thunk it? And, the real surprise is the NASDAQ index of small stocks, down only 3.3% for the year and actually UP 9.3% for the last 12 months as of Friday’s close[i]. The 10-year Treasury has gained 17.9% as the yield plummeted to just 0.65%[ii].

The core consumer price index (CPI) is holding at 2.1%[iii]; but, as we see huge stimulus spending driving up the debt, the inevitable result may be too much money chasing too few goods and services, thus driving up inflation – an argument to get the economy moving again in order to drive up production while increasing the job numbers and sources of revenue. Debt as a percentage of the GDP will be the key figure to watch.

A key worry is a debt spiral. Treasury secretary Mnuchin is already trying to fund the growing budget deficit – the $2.2 trillion stimulus package is the largest ever passed. John Briggs, head of strategy for the Americas at Natwest Markets, thinks the sheer amount of debt coming is really a war-time sort of funding.

The government has been selling short-term debt (Treasury bills that mature in one year or less) virtually as fast as possible – and more is coming.

The fiscal 2020 deficit – a deficit that needs to be funded somehow – will be four times as large as last year’s $3.8 trillion – almost 19% of GDP, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a non-partisan group. Few on ‘the hill’ see a need for caution right now, given the threat of the virus, but there is little doubt corrective action will be on the horizon.

Economists at JPMorgan Chase & Company say GDP will shrink an annualized 40% in the second quarter, according to a feature in Bloomberg News. That, of course, means a huge amount of debt is coming in the second quarter.

Having a solid formal financial plan with the right allocation is now more important than ever. The markets will come back, but because of the CARES Act and the SECURE Act – and added market volatility – the strategies that used to work are now changing.

Jim

[i] Source: MacroBond Financial AB. S&P 500 is represented by the S&P 500 Index, DJIA is represented by the Dow Jones Industrial Average, NASDAQ is represented by the NASDAQ Composite Index, Foreign Stocks are represented by the MSCI EAFE Index and Emerging Markets are represented by the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. Sectors based on S&P 500 Index sector indexes. You cannot purchase an index.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

Opinions expressed are those of the author. The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

Simple. This major change will bring in $15.7 billion in tax revenue by 2029, according to the joint committee on taxation in their report on the bill, H.R. 1994. And, guess whose money they want? Yes, yours.

The administration, of course, is looking for ways to address the debt by raising revenue without actually talking much about the debt. They’re even kicking the can down the road on taxes, talking about making the current tax-cuts “permanent” – as if Washington had ever passed a permanent tax bill; it’s “Washington-speak”. The current tax law is set to “sunset”, i.e., expire in 2026, taking us all back to the pre-2017 tax rates. Permanency would be achieved by removing the sunset date. So far, so good; but, if you’re one of those planning for the next two decades, you should be thinking about what the next ten congressional elections might bring.

The Stretch IRA is all but eliminated. Under the old law, an heir could inherit an IRA and stretch the RMDs over his/her life expectancy. Okay, considering the inheritance will probably take place during their peak earning years. So, a $17,000 RMD on a $500,000 IRA (purely hypothetical) won’t make much difference. However, under The SECURE Act the inheritor must liquidate the IRA by the 10th year. There’s NO RMD REQUIREMENT, so, the heir could let the IRA grow until the last year—but, then would be required to withdraw ALL funds in one year—talk about playing roulette with what the tax laws will be when the entire balance is added to that year’s income for calculating the tax bill. Alternatively, the heir could take a 10% yearly distribution, for example. But, in our example, that would add $50,000 each year to taxable income during what would likely be the heir’s peak earning years!

For the owner of a traditional IRA, remember that RMDs are considered in two other areas: (1) how much of Social Security income will be subject to taxation, and (2) as income for determining your Medicare Part B premiums. Oh, yes, high income in retirement means higher Part B premiums.

It’s a good time, especially for those with substantial incomes, to do some planning.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

The SECURE Act has changed the game. I discussed the things you need to know in a previous post; but maybe the biggest game-changer, especially for parents who were planning on leaving substantial nest-eggs to their kids, is the elimination of Stretch IRAs. The big unexpected inheritor just might be Uncle Sam.

Before the SECURE Act, the child could take required minimum distributions (RMDs) based on his/her own life expectancy. Theoretically, if they inherited early, the RMD would be so small they could actually continue growing the nest egg in perpetuity – even grandchildren could benefit! No more. Now, the inherited IRA has to be liquidated in ten years.

The odds are most boomers will die when their children are in their peak earning years. So, an inherited $500,000 IRA can create some tax problems! An inheriting child in their 50s, who before the SECURE Act may have taken RMDs in the neighborhood of $17,000, will now be required to take a first RMD of $50,000…. and that’s in addition to their income during their peak earning years. Add to that the double-whammy that the current tax law sunsets in 2026 and the old 2017 tax brackets come back into effect, and you have a perfect storm – I won’t depress you with the outlook for tax legislation in view of the current national debt.

The elimination of the stretch IRA is expected to add $15.7 billion to the federal budget over the next ten years as baby boomers begin the pass away.

As you can imagine, this has tremendous estate planning ramifications for those wishing to pass-on wealth to their heirs. Now that the stretch is gone, here are three you may want to consider.

Roth Conversions: This is an obvious one. Traditional IRAs may be tax-deferred, but they really should be called “tax-postponed”… until tax brackets are higher (remember the national debt and politician’s desires to spend tax dollars to gain reelection). If state inheritance taxes are an issue, a conversion could reduce the size of the estate and reduce tax exposure, too. A conversion may not be the right move for everyone. There are current tax bracket shift issues that should be considered.

Life Insurance: Death benefits are generally tax-free, i.e., not included in the beneficiary’s income. Use distributions from the IRA to pay the policy and bingo – money goes to the kids and by-passes Uncle Sam. Depending on age and insurability, there are even advanced designs that could provide with tax-free income during retirement, as well. It’s not your father’s – or grandfather’s – life insurance anymore. It has become the ‘swiss army knife’ of financial tools.

Charitable Remainder Trusts (CRTs): Use your IRA to fund a CRT. This allows parents to create an income stream for their children with part of the IRA while the rest goes to charity. While the CRT can grow assets tax-free, the kids do pay tax on the income withdrawn. There are two types: an annuity trust and a remainder trust. The first distributes a fixed annuity and doesn’t allow future contributions; the second distributes a fixed percentage of the initial assets and allows for continued contributions.

Naturally, you should discuss anything you’re considering with your financial, tax, and legal advisors before making any moves. It pays to plan.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

Giving to charity can create significant tax advantages. Many people use real estate and securities to gain these advantages.

If you were to SELL an appreciated asset, the gain would be subject to capital gains tax. However, by donating the appreciated asset to a charity, however, you can receive an income tax deduction equal to the fair market value of the asset and pay no capital gains tax on the increased value.

Example: Alan purchased $25,000 of publicly-traded stock several years ago. That stock is now worth $100,000. If he sells the stock, he must pay capital gains tax on the $75,000 gain. However, Alan can donate the stock to a qualified charity and, in turn, receive a $100,000 charitable income tax deduction. When the charity then sells the stock, no capital gains tax is due on the appreciation.

This may create a problem, however. When Alan made this gift to charity, his family is deprived of those assets that they might otherwise have received.

Potential solution: In order to replace the value of the assets transferred to a charity, the Alan establishes a second trust – an irrevocable life insurance trust – and the trustee acquires life insurance on Alan’s life in an amount equal to the value of the charitable gift. Using the charitable deduction income tax savings and any annual cash flow from a charitable trust or charitable gift annuity, Alan makes gifts to the irrevocable life insurance trust that are then used to pay the life insurance policy premiums. At Alan’s death, the life insurance proceeds generally pass to the his heirs free of income tax and estate tax, replacing the value of the assets that were given to the charity. Not bad!

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

The SECURE Act contains quite a few changes that impact both individuals and business owners.

Two Key Changes For Individuals:

70-1/2 is out.

New Law Raises Age for RMDs from 70½ to 72: Under the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement (SECURE) Act of 2019, if you turn 70½ years old on or after January 1, 2020, you are eligible for the law’s changes and generally must begin taking RMDs by April 1 of the year following the year that you turn age 72.

People who turned 70½ years old in 2019 are not eligible for the law’s changes and generally must begin withdrawing money by April 1, 2020

It’s eliminated for most beneficiaries of Traditional and Roth IRAs whose owners pass away in 2020 or later (Note: previous rules still apply to certain beneficiaries and to all inherited IRAs whose owners passed away before 2020). There are no mandatory annual distributions, but the entire inherited Traditional or Roth IRA balance must be withdrawn by the end of the tenth year.

There are some exclusions as well as other changes – talk with your financial or tax advisor.

Business Owners

There are a number of key changes for business owners, including

Expanded access to annuities within retirement plans in order to help retirees establish their own “pension” plans.

Retirement plan statements will be required to include a lifetime income disclosure at least once during any 12-month period

Multiple-Employer plan rules relaxed – this allows a number of unrelated businesses to set-up a plan with one provider/administrator in an effort to reduce costs – this will help small businesses most.

Of course, there’s more; but, this should give you an idea of why it will pay to work closely with your financial and tax advisors.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.

Few people think about this – and I wish I could be the smart guy that thought of this for this post, but I wasn’t[i]. It’s something called the widow’s penalty tax; it affects the surviving spouse.

After a spouse’s death, the survivor usually goes from a joint return to filing as a single filer, usually resulting in an increase in the survivor’s tax bracket. This happens because often the survivor’s income can be almost as much as they were filing when using a joint return – Bingo! – a large tax bill. One advisor’s client went from a 24% bracket (filing jointly) to a 32% bracket as the survivor[ii]

How to protect yourself?

A series of partial IRA conversions (to Roth IRAs) over several years, keeping the amounts low enough not to change your tax bracket, can help. Do this after age 59-1/2 but before taking Social Security benefits. The distributions will avoid the 10% penalty and, at the same time, take advantage of the low joint rate. By the way, it’s worth mentioning that the current tax law, which has lower brackets than prior law, sunsets in 2026, meaning brackets are set to return to their previous higher rates. Another benefit: the conversions will reduce your taxable income when you are forced to begin your required minimum distributions (RMDs) after age 70-1/2.

Jim Lorenzen is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER®professional and An Accredited Investment Fiduciary®in his 21st year of private practice as Founding Principal ofThe Independent Financial Group,a fee-only registered investment advisor with clients located in New York, Florida, and California. He is also licensed for insurance as an independent agent under California license 0C00742. IFG helps specializes in crafting wealth design strategies around life goals by using aproven planning processcoupled with a cost-conscious objective and non-conflicted risk management philosophy.

The Independent Financial Groupdoes not provide legal or tax advice and nothing contained herein should be construed as securities or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment to the individual reader. The general information provided should not be acted upon without obtaining specific legal, tax, and investment advice from an appropriate licensed professional.